Gunnar Wolf <[email protected]> writes: > Simon Josefsson dijo [Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 10:17:45AM +0100]: >>> I do suspect, however, that it is possible to have a conversation where >>> we do *not* lump multiple concerns together. >> >>Okay, so what is a better name? >> >>Since the initial/primary purpose of the blend is to produce and support >>installer/live images built without any non-DFSG artifacts, it seems the >>name should convey something related to this. Relevant keywords include >>'open', 'free', 'libre', 'gnu/', 'dfsg', others? >> >>Is 'Debian Deblob' okay to you? Gunnar? 'Debian Noblob'? >> >>Would 'Debian DFSG' be okay? Or 'Debian DFSG-only'? > > I think that, among your offered choices, the first three (open, free, > libre) would fall very closely in _my_ book. Saying it is “GNU/Debian” > would be wrong, as not all of Debian comes from the GNU project. I think > “DFSG-only” could sum it up correctly, but it is a very “user-unfriendly” > term. But I like the “deblob” or “noblob” monikers: they are specific (you > are “yanking out” the blobs), they are memorable and pronunceable in a > single breath, they are meaningful to the people caring for this debate. > >>The 'deblob' word is coming from the Linux-libre effort, where the >>deblob.sh script removes non-free stuff in the Linux kernel source code. >>This is not comparable to how the current Debian Libre Live images are >>generated, which are built using live-build with a small configuration. >>But maybe the word could work anyway. > > But it is a good descriptive effort / analogy, /methinks.
Thanks - I take this as a +1 so unless there is more feedback or suggestions, I hope to release Debian Deblob 13.4 to sunset Debian Libre once Debian 13.4 is out. /Simon
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
